GENERAL ACCIDENT FIRE AND LIFE ASSURANCE CORPORATION, LTD., PETITIONER,
v.
SCOTT GOLDING, RESPONDENT
GENERAL ACCIDENT FIRE AND LIFE ASSURANCE CORPORATION, LTD., PETITIONER,
SCOTT GOLDING, RESPONDENT
436 So. 2d 1108
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1983)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Topics
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Scope Of Discovery cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari to review an order of the trial court, relating to discovery:
Plaintiffs counsel may inquire of any witness who has knowledge of the facts and circumstances of SCOTT GOLDING’S claim and the witness must answer any questions pertaining to his workup and evaluation of the claim either against State Farm Insurance Company or GENERAL ACCIDENT FIRE & LIFE ASSURANCE CORPORATION, LTD., irrespective of any time frame.
We grant the petition and hold that the scope of this order is so broad that it constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law.
Accordingly, we quash the order and remand the cause with directions to provide sufficient limitations within the order to prohibit discovery of appellant’s work product.
HURLEY, DELL and WALDEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Gizela von Hohenberg and Mario Sorrentino, 595 So. 2d 303 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…e condominium association attorney. We grant the petition and hold that the scope of the instant order is so broad that it constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law. See General Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corp. v. Golding, 436 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). Whether all or a portion of the information sought to be discovered is protected by work product immunity, Airocar, Inc. v. Goldman, 474 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), or by attorney-client privilege remains in question. Furthe…